Russ Allbery writes: > [re diversity statement] > > That's actually part of the reason why I, personally, would like it to be > a GR. I'd like to see the Debian Project make that statement, and putting > the stamp of official blessing of a GR on it does make that statement > somewhat stronger (and hence somewhat more effective in extending that > welcome).
I agree. > > The problem with a strict interpretation of the Constitution is for > > instance that there are other documents in a somewhat similar case as > > the diversity welcoming message, like the « Debian Position on Software > > Patents ». > > Personally, I think there would be a lot of merit in holding a GR on that > as well. Legal issues are always highly contentious, and it's easier to > tell people to follow that position with their Debian work when it's been > voted on as a GR. I disagree on this one, at least in its current form. The Software Patents document is a mixture of position statement (for outsiders to see what our view is) and internal process advice (for insiders and allies to know what to do). I don't think the latter should be the subject of a GR. Otherwise the logical conclusion is that we may end up voting on the developers' reference. And because I don't think it makes sense to vote on whether we agree with legal advice. Ian. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20373.23644.57816.539...@chiark.greenend.org.uk